4748 Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 2005, Vol. 48, No. 15
Letters
Figure 3. Effect of compound 1 (1, 3, and 10 mg/kg, po for 28
days) on the body composition of DIO rats. *(p < 0.05 vs
baseline, paired t-test).
Figure 2. Effect of compound 1 (1, 3, and 10 mg/kg po for 28
days) on the body weight of DIO rats. All values are means (
SEM; n ) 11-12/group.
weight gain (1.2 ( 10.6 g, and 2.2 ( 4.0 g weight gain
at 3 and 10 mg/kg 1, respectively, relative to 25.2 ( 4.6
g weight gain with control; p < 0.05. DEXA scanning
revealed that the decrease in body weight gain at the
10 mg/kg dose was associated with a selective decrease
in fat mass (Figure 3). Animals treated at a 1 mg/kg
dosage did not show any significant change in body
weight or food intake relative to control. Importantly,
compound 1 did not cause taste aversion or place
preference at a dose of 3 and 10 mg/kg.
Compound 1 showed excellent in vitro and moderate
in vivo activity; however, further studies with this
compound were discontinued due to the presence of a
highly mutagenic, Ames positive biarylaniline subunit.15
Although the compound 1 is nonmutagenic, and there
is no evidence to suggest that biarylaniline 21 is
generated in vivo, the risk of possible exposure to this
highly mutagenic biarylaniline intermediate at any
stage in the development of the series was considered
unacceptable. Our research focus was then shifted to
identify a nonmutagenic functional group exhibiting the
otherwise promising profile of the biaryl urea.13 The
other strategies followed to address the mutagenicity
issue will be reported in due course.
with plasma levels from rat PK studies of the amino-
ethyl biaryl urea analogues. The SAR on the urea and
biaryl portion of the molecules tracked similarly to that
of the piperidine series. Compound 24 exhibited excel-
lent potency and also showed reasonable oral plasma
levels in rats. Metabolite identification studies indicated
that compound 24 underwent demethylation in vivo to
provide compound 25. The metabolite, and to some
extent the parent compound, exhibited potent 5-HT
reuptake transporter inhibition (5-HT Ki ) 27 ( 2 nM
for compound 25 and 1076 ( 187 nM for 24). At this
point, this was a significant issue because serotonergic
modulation can also play a significant role in the
regulation of food consumption and weight loss.12 There-
fore, our goal became to eliminate serotonin transporter
affinity in order to understand the effects of a pure
MCH-R1 antagonist as an antiobesity agent. Substitu-
tion at the aryl urea, and alkyl group alterations at the
amine terminus, did not reduce 5-HT activity. However,
the pyrrolidine and piperazine analogues 1 (5-HT Ki >
1 uM) and 28 (5-HT Ki >1 uM) showed promising
selectivity in addition to maintaining good MCH-R1
activity. Further SAR studies of pyrrolidine analogues
resulted in the identification of 1, which showed an
excellent profile in terms of MCH-R1 affinity and
selectivity over other receptors such as NPY, 5-HT, M2,
MCH-R2, and 5-HT transporter inhibition (>1 µM)
along with oral rat plasma levels, including good brain
levels (579 ng/g) at 6 h.
Oral administration of 1 to 24 h fasted diet-induced
obese (DIO) mice (30 mg/kg) significantly reduced food
intake relative to vehicle control by 16 ( 6%, 17 ( 6%
and 14 ( 5% at 4, 6, and 24 h postdose, respectively (p
< 0.05, t-test). Using an ex vivo binding assay13 as a
surrogate measure of receptor occupancy, compound 1
exhibited 85 ( 3% and 56 ( 3% inhibition of MCH
binding to MCH-R1 in mouse brain slices at 6 and 24 h
postdose, respectively. Moreover, compounds with low
ex vivo binding lacked efficacy, indicating that changes
in food intake are likely due to MCH-R1 antagonism.
When orally administered to DIO rats for 28 d, com-
pound 1 (1, 3, or 10 mg/kg) produced a dose-dependent
decrease in food intake [F3,45 ) 8.83; p ) 0.0001] and
body weight gain [F3,45 ) 3.74; p ) 0.0175] throughout
the duration of the treatment (Figure 2).14 Specifically,
1 significantly reduced cumulative food intake by 16.9
( 2.1% and 13.2 ( 1.6% (3 and 10 mg/kg 1, respectively;
p < 0.05) relative to control rats while suppressing body
Acknowledgment. We thank Dr. Catherine Strader
and Dr. John Piwinski for helpful discussions, support,
and encouragement, Dr. Jesse Wong and Dr. Mark
Liang for scale-up of intermediates, and Dr. Kathleen
Cox for pharmacokinetic studies.
Note Added after ASAP Publication. In the ver-
sion of the manuscript posted June 24, 2005, compounds
3, 8-20 in Scheme 1 were drawn incorrectly. The
corrected structures are presented in the version posted
June 29, 2005.
Supporting Information Available: Experimental pro-
cedures and characterization data for compounds 1, 3, 8-20,
and 23-32. This material is available free of charge via the
References
(1) Saito, Y.; Nothacker, H.-P.; Civelli, O. Melanin-concentrating
hormone receptor: an orphan receptor fits the key. Trends
Endocrinol. Metab. 2000, 11, 299-303.
(2) Schwartz, M. W.; Woods, S. C.; Porte, D., Jr.; Selley, R. J.;
Baskin, D. G. Central nervous system control of food intake.
Nature 2000, 404, 661-671.
(3) Della-Zuana, O.; Presse, F.; Ortola, C.; Duhault, J.; Nahon, J.
L.; Levens, N. Acute and chronic administration of melanin-
concentrating hormone enhances food intake and body weight
in Wistar and Sprague-Dawley rats. Int. J. Obesity 2002, 26,
1289-1295.